The Peninsula

Korea’s Strategic Futures Between Continental and Maritime Powers

This is the first of two pieces exploring the continental-maritime balance on and around the Korean Peninsula

Attention has turned to the re-emergence of a Cold War-like division in East Asia, with China, North Korea, and Russia on one side and the United States, South Korea, and Japan on the other. More recent reports of North Korea-Russia cooperation heighten fears that this division has become more extensive.

Nonetheless, Cold War-like division is not foreign to those familiar with the Korean Peninsula. In fact, most studies of the Korean Peninsula start with the Cold War and its role in the Korean War (1950-1953), focusing on the birth of South Korea, or the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the subsequent shared sacrifices of the ROK and US-led United Nations Command (UNC) forces sent to defend the country. However, it is easy to forget that Korea has a much deeper strategic history and culture that started well before the Cold War.

Often neglected, the Korean Peninsula is a contesting ground between continental and maritime powers. The Korean Peninsula sits between China and Japan, acting as both a springboard to China and a launching pad to Japan. It is the geographic nexus where the continental meets the maritime. For comparison, the China-Korea-Japan nexus acts as the East Asian equivalent to the Western Europe-Low Countries-United Kingdom passage. Historically, the Korean Peninsula has acted as a pivot over which continental and maritime powers vie for control and influence.

The Historical Contest

China and Japan—and their historical constituents—sought to control the peninsula in the 13th century (the Mongol Empire), 16th century (the Azuchi-Momoyama period in Japan), and 17th century (the Later Jin and Qing dynasties in Manchuria and China). In the modern period, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan recognized and acted on Korea’s strategic importance, while Russia, China, and Japan vied for control in the lead up to Japanese annexation in 1907. English-language accounts of the modern period, which accord the names of combatants in war nomenclature, belie the fact that the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895) and the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) were contested over and on the Korean Peninsula.

Analyzing the numerical distribution of years in which the Korean Peninsula was under continental versus maritime spheres of influence offers insight into the shaping of Korea’s political, cultural, and economic landscape. Broadly, the history of the Korean Peninsula can be divided into periods of continental influence by China and phases of maritime influence by Japan and, more recently, the United States.

China’s influence over Korea has lasted approximately 1,200 years, making it the dominant continental power in the Korean historical context. The influence of China over the Korean Peninsula dates back to the early centuries of its civilization. For much of Korean history, the peninsula was either directly controlled by Chinese dynasties or within their sphere of influence. Major periods of Chinese influence include:

• Han Dynasty’s Commanderies (108 BCE-313 CE): Chinese military outposts, such as the Lelang Commandery, were established and exerted direct control over parts of northern Korea.
• Tang Dynasty’s Intervention (668 CE-mid-9th century): The Tang Dynasty’s alliance with Korea’s Silla kingdomled to the unification of the Korean Peninsula under Silla’s rule, which operated as a tributary state to Tang China.
• Goryeo and Joseon Dynasties (10th century-19th century): The Goryeo and Joseon dynasties maintained tributary relations with successive Chinese dynasties (Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing), acknowledging Chinese suzerainty and following Confucian cultural models.
• Russian/Soviet Influence (19th century-Current): Imperial Russia extended its reach to the Pacific Coast and annexed territories historically controlled by China and Korea. In the late 19th century, it competed with other powers to exert influence over Korea. After World War II, the Soviet Union occupied North Korea and supported its attempts to unify the peninsula. Russia continues to exert influence over North Korea’s strategic, diplomatic, and economic affairs.
• Chinese Influence (20th century-Current): China continued to influence Korea’s decision-making as the influence of maritime states began to grow. In October 1950, with North Korea near defeat, China supported the restoration of the status quo and continues to exert influence over North Korea’s strategic, diplomatic, and economic affairs.

Maritime influence on Korea has lasted around 114 years, including Japanese colonial rule and US strategic influence in South Korea:

• 13th-17th century: Japan pursues various encroachments and raids over Korea.
• Imperial Encroachments and Raids: France (1866), the United Kingdom (1885-1887), the United States (1871), and Japan (1875) all exerted maritime control and occupied Korean territory for short periods.
• Japanese Colonial Rule (1910-1945): Japan’s annexation of Korea brought the peninsula under a maritime power’s direct control, with a focus on industrial exploitation and assimilation policies that drastically altered Korea’s economy and society.
• US Influence (1945-Present): Following World War II and the Korean War, South Korea has been a close ally of the United States, relying on US military support, economic aid, and political backing to build a stable, democratic society.

A numerical contrast of years under these spheres of influence highlights the historical predominance of continental power. Continental influence—more continuous in the northern environs of the peninsula—has lasted more than ten times as long as maritime influence, which was more continuous in the southern environs.

The sheer disparity in influence illustrates that the Korean Peninsula has historically been far more influenced by its continental neighbor, China, than by maritime powers. However, with technological advancements and improvements in capabilities, maritime influence has increasingly shaped Korea’s modern identity, security, governance, and diplomacy. The legacy of these influences continues to shape geopolitical dynamics on the Korean Peninsula today.

The Modern Contest

A long historical view of the Korean Peninsula thus sets the region as a measure of competition between continental and maritime powers. When continental powers are strong, the peninsula threatens the maritime regions surrounding it. When the continental powers are weak, the maritime powers encroach upon the periphery and threaten the continent. However, the modern period reads differently.

The US-ROK alliance is rooted in maritime influence. South Korea remains heavily aligned with the United States in defense and foreign policy. More recently, as regional security concerns have grown, South Korea has integrated itself into a wider network of like-minded democratic states that stretch across the Indo-Pacific, including Japan and Australia. Between the expeditionary nature of its participation in conflicts after the Korean War, its export-oriented economy and shipbuilding dominance, and its temptations toward a blue-water navy, South Korea has developed into a maritime power.

North Korea remains primarily under China’s sphere of influence, relying on Beijing for economic support and diplomatic cover, while accepting and willfully encouraging Russian posturing as a peripheral but threatening influence. With internal security as its primary concern, heavily reliant on the support of continental allies, and maintaining a navy focused primarily on coastal operations, North Korea has developed into a more insular, continental power.

Despite its modern transformation, the Korean Peninsula remains a contested ground between continental and maritime powers, with South and North Korea facing each other at the front of coalitions of maritime and continental powers. Consequently, when thinking about the Korean Peninsula and its strategic futures, we need to think about what variables influence this balance between maritime and continental power.

Such variables include the changing nature of how new and emerging technologies in air, space, and cyber contribute to continental and maritime power; the interconnectedness of continental and maritime strategies; the balance and asymmetries between continental and maritime power; and the strengthening of existing alliances and development of new coalitions of continental and maritime states. The following piece will further examine how these variables are affecting the maritime and continental balance.